疫情时代的室内：公共和私人领域之间 | 中国建筑师的家
|最后更新: 2023-3-31
Created
Mar 31, 2023 10:11 AM
专栏
见识家
人物
内容标签
国家
事务所
本章节“居家工作：疫情期间的中国建筑师“收录于布鲁姆斯伯里出版社 (Bloomsbury PLC.) 出版的题为《新冠时代的室内: 公共和私人领域之间的室内设计》的新书中 Interiors in the Era of Covid: Interior Design between the Public and Private Realms, 2022 (forthcoming) 编辑：Penny Sparke, Eris Ioannidou, Pat Kirkham, Stephen Knott, Jana Scholze 全书目录请见文末。 | 居家工作：疫情期间的中国建筑师 | Working at Home: Architects during the Pandemic in China Ye Xu (许晔), Katharina Borsi, Jonathan Hale Keywords Home, Drawing, Territory, Live/Work, Public/Private, China 关键词 家、绘图、领域、生活/工作、公共/私人、中国 Introduction 引言 Since the COVID-19 outbreaks in late 2019, some of the most important matters relating to individual body and health have increasingly moved out of the familiar and relatively intimate setting of the home and into the public setting where healthcare is dispensed, and digital tracking occurs. At the same time, digital technology and communication allow the ‘managed intrusion’ (Mahmood 2007:77-100) of the workplace into the domestic space, and shopping, education and other services further moved from the public sphere to the spaces of the home. Simultaneously, the connection between people operating in virtual space - for work, communication, and leisure - is accelerating rapidly, reshaping our experiences of living and working. This study seeks to expand the existing research on home-based working and explore how the relationships between the public and the private, the urban and the domestic, are constructed in our homes. Only in this way can we improve the design regulation of the built environment better to support new types of live-work combinations, at both the individual building and the urban scale. 自从2019年底新冠疫情爆发以来，与人们身体和健康最密切相关的私人事务越来越多地从我们相对熟悉和亲密的家庭环境中移出，进入到提供医疗服务与实施数字跟踪的公共环境。同时，数字和通信技术允许工作场所 "受控地侵入(managed intrusion)"（Mahmood 2007: 77-100）到家庭空间中；购物、教育和其他服务也进一步从公共空间进入家宅中。在此背景下，人与人的关联在虚拟空间中加速构建，这种基于工作、社交、或娱乐的线上互动正在重塑我们的生活和工作经验。本研究旨在扩展现有居家工作的研究，以探索公共和私人、城市和家庭之间的关系是如何在我们的“家”中构建的；并尝试为包括单体建筑和城市空间在内的建成环境提出优化设计建议，以更好地支持新的生活/工作方式。 Studies undertaken to date about the architecture of home-basedwork have been approached from two main angles. One has focused on the rise of the bifurcation between living and working and the corresponding construction of the idea ‘domesticity’ in the nineteenth century (Evans 1978: 267-78, Hayden 1982, Rybczynski 1986, Benjamin 1999, Heynen and Baydar eds. 2005, Borsi 2009: 132-52). In the modern tight domestic unit, the relationships between public and private, and selves and others, are different from those in the medieval multi-functional households. Other writings explore the dual-use building type that combines dwelling and workplace primarily through case studies. Beyond Live/Work: The architecture of home-based work (Holliss 2015) traces the architectural history of the work-home. It analyses the lives and premises of eighty-six contemporary home-based workers and has generated a series of typologies and design considerations for the work-home. Living Over the Store: Architecture and local urban life (Davis 2012) argued that the architecture and living type of the shop/home is an important component of the liveable city, one that facilitates walkability, face-to-face interactions, and a vibrant street scene. House as a Mirror of Self: Exploring the deeper meaning of home (Marcus 2006) suggested that spatial, visual, and aural separation is critical when we work at home. 目前，针对居家工作的建筑研究主要从两个角度进行。一是关注19世纪生活和工作之间二分关系的产生，以及相应的 "家庭生活 (domesticity) "概念的建构 (Evans 1978: 267-78, Hayden 1982,Rybczynski 1986, Benjamin 1999, Heynen and Baydar eds. 2005, Borsi 2009:132-52)。 研究强调，在现代紧凑的家宅单元中，公共与私人、自我与他人之间的关系不同于中世纪的多功能家庭中的关系。第二类主要通过更为具体的当代案例研究来探讨结合住宅与工作场所的双重用途的建筑类型。《超越生活/工作：居家工作的建筑》（Holliss 2015）追溯了工作之家的建筑历史，分析了86个当代居家工作者的生活和房屋，并将其设计思考转化为一系列工作之家的类型学成果。《下店上居：建筑与本地城市生活》（Davis 2012）认为，商店/住宅与其容纳的生活方式是宜居城市的重要组成部分，它通过鼓励步行、面对面的互动，使街道景观充满活力。《作为自我镜像的房子：探索家的深层意义》（Marcus 2006）则更为关心个人层面，它提出，在家工作时，空间、视觉和听觉的分隔是至关重要的。 Topics within this theme also include urban research that analyses mixed-use planning strategies (Zenkteler et al. 2019); the investigation into architecture/interior design to better accommodate home-based work (Dolan 2012,Holliss 2017); the feminist research focusing on the relationship between women's social production and domestic reproduction (Giudici 2018: 1203-29, Tattaraand Aureli 2018: 194-202); and smart homes and teleworking in the context of information technologies (Gurstein 2001) Much of this research stems from a period prior to the pandemic and foregrounds existing or new typologies able to accommodate multiple scenarios of occupation. The ongoing shift and generalisation of flexible working provides a new urgency for an analysis of the ambiguity and diversity of live-work scenarios in standard dwellings, which has so far not received much attention. 该领域中的其他议题还包括：在城市研究层面分析混合使用的规划策略（Zenkteleret al. 2019）；调研建筑/室内设计，以期更好地适应居家工作（Dolan 2012，Holliss 2017）；在女性主义视角下探讨女性的社会生产和家庭再生产之间关系（Giudici2018: 1203-29, Tattara and Aureli 2018: 194-202）；以及信息技术背景下的智能家居和远程工作（Gurstein 2001）。需要注意的是，上述研究大多来源于疫情之前，虽然它们预示了能够适应多种使用情境的、现有的或者新兴的建筑类型。但目前灵活工作模式的不断转变和普遍化，为分析标准化住宅中的生活/工作场景的模糊性和多样性提出了新的需求，并同时具有事实上和学术上的紧迫性。 This chapter is positioned within the growing discourse about the interior that disconnects the idea of home territory from a static and private place, presenting the former as a more open, permeable, social and mobile concept (Bachelard 1969, Deleuze and Guattari 1987, Massey 1994, Wise 2000: 295-310, Mallett 2004: 62-89, Rice 2006, Smitheram and Woodcock 2009). The initial investigation was conducted in 2020 during the pandemic and a total of 20 architects from 5 major cities in China were interviewed. The two case studies selected for this chapter represent ambiguous and complex modes of domesticity and are representative of Chinese architects’ ways of homeworking and cultures of inhabitation during the pandemic. The primary aim of this chapter is to conceptualise different ways of shaping and mobilising home territories in the context of working at home. The second aim is to contribute to discussions about the potential of drawings as both illustrative forms and analytic methods for observing and representing the interior and domesticity. Finally, it argues that the home can be seen as a constantly changing territorial network, thus pointing to the shifting conceptions of the public and private in domestic space. 本章定位于日益增长的关于室内(interior)的论述话语中，强调家宅领域并非是一个静态的和私密的场所，而应将其理解为一个更为开放、具有可渗透性、社会性且不断流变的概念（Bachelard 1969, Deleuze and Guattari 1987, Massey 1994, Wise 2000: 295-310, Mallett 2004: 62-89, Rice 2006, Smitheram and Woodcock 2009）。本研究的调研在2020年疫情期间进行，邀请并访谈了来自中国5个主要城市的20位建筑师。本章选择了两个家庭生活情境具有模糊性和复杂性的代表案例，以呈现中国建筑师在疫情期间的居家办公和居住文化。本章关注在居家工作的背景下，如何概念化主体塑造和调动家庭领域的不同模式；在该议题推进过程中，本文将同时探讨，绘图，即本研究的主要说明形式和分析方法，对于观察和表现室内和家庭生活的潜力。最后，在绘图和分析的基础上，本文认为“家”可被视为一个不断变化的领域网络，并指出家庭空间中公共和私人概念的变化。 A minimal home of one’s own 一个人的极小居住空间
notion image
Fig.1. A minimal home of one’s own, drawn by Ye Xu 一个人的极小居住空间，绘制：许晔 Figure 1 shows the minimal dormitory room of a young male architecture student who lives alone at the student accommodation within the campus of Tongji University in Yangpu District, Shanghai. The generic space is static, dull, and cold. But when lived in (encountered, manipulated, touched, voiced, glanced at, practised) it radiates a field of force, a shape of space (Wise, 2000: 297). 图1绘制了一名建筑系男生的极小居住空间。疫情期间，他独自住在上海杨浦区同济大学的一间学生宿舍里。这个通用空间是静态的、沉闷的、冰冷的，但是当生活在其中发生时（邂逅、摆布、触摸、发声、瞥视、实践等），它就放射出了力量的场域，随之空间亦被塑形（Wise,2000: 297）。 The drawing shows the architect’s body movements as well as the room, furniture, and objects, in order to reveal the fluid socio-spatial relationships in temporal and scalar dimensions. Although living in acollective housing unit, the occupant kept quite a secluded, atomised lifestyle, and did not interact with the other residents. His typical day involved several hours sitting at his desk, clicking the mouse to draw architectural plans, and communicating with colleagues via email and zoom; browsing through a restaurant take-out application and ordering food delivery from nearby; eating at the same desk, and sometimes before the meal, taking a food picture and posting it on Instagram. The regular repetition of his bodily and mental actions blends with the living space he moves through, establishing his everyday life and thus a layer of the home territory. 该图绘制了受访建筑师的身体运动以及房间、家具和物品，以揭示在时空维度上流动的社会-空间关系。虽然居住在集体住宅的一个单元中，但他保持着相对独立的、原子化的生活方式。受访建筑师典型的一天是：连续几个小时坐在办公桌前，点击鼠标绘制建筑图纸，通过微信、邮件和线上会议平台与同事沟通，在手机上浏览外卖程序、从附近的餐厅点餐，然后仍在办公桌上吃饭，有时在吃饭之前，会拍一张食物照片发给朋友。他惯常重复的身体和精神活动与他的生活空间相融合，确立了日常生活的形态，也形成了家的领域。 Although some actions are routine andrepeated, they are also unpredictable, impermanent, non-linear, and grounded in the evanescent reality of movement. Some fleeting behaviours also indicate certain spatial boundaries of his home which can quickly change, e.g., body positions, or the sound of laughter. ‘During the lockdown there were no other occupants in my building,’ said the architect, ‘so I was free to play music louder than usual and make a more heavy-smelling meal of curry.’ The territorial bubbles of sound, smell, light, and smoke extend beyond his minimal dwelling. The extension of domestic space also includes more permanent scenarios. For instance, the appropriation of communal space shows a material way of expanding the home territory beyond the interior. During the pandemic, the architect occupied the shared corridor space as a semi-contaminated zone, leaving there worn masks, trash can, shoes and coats, as well as cleaning supplies - from disinfectant to a small vacuum cleaner - and entering his room only after being fully cleaned and disinfected. 尽管一些日常行为是常规和重复的，它们也是同样不可预测的、非线性的，并且建立在流变的短暂现实之上。一些转瞬即逝的行为，如身体姿势或笑声，都暗示了家的某些空间边界是可以迅速变化的。“在居家隔离期间，我们楼里几乎没有其他住户，”受访建筑师说，“我放音乐可以比平时更大声，还可以做味道很重的菜。”声音、气味、光线和烟雾的领域泡泡扩展到了他的极小居住单元之外。家庭空间的外延也包括一些更为长期固定的场景。例如，对共用空间的挪用是一种以物质形式将家庭领域扩展到室外的方式。在疫情期间，受访建筑师占据了共用的走廊空间作为半污染区，摆放戴过的口罩、垃圾桶、鞋子和大衣、以及清洁用品（从消毒液到小型吸尘器），每次进房间之前都先在走廊进行消毒清洁。 The opening up of home starts from the communal space and moves onto the expanded spaces of the urban and the global. The trajectories of the architect’s fingers moving the mouse or sliding across the phone screen show the relationship between interactions in virtual space and circulations in physical space, and a continuity between interior and exterior, public and private. 家的开放，从走廊和社区共用空间开始，直到整个城市，甚至全球。图1绘制了建筑师的手在移动鼠标或在手机屏上滑动的轨迹，我们可以观察到虚拟空间中的互动和物理空间中的循环之间存在互相映射的关系，室内和室外、公共和私人领域之间有某种连续性。 For the purposes of virtual meetings, the architect redecorated his home in order to set the partial interior suitable for public display, using bookshelves, decorative paintings and plants as the background setting, and the behaviour was shared by several other interviewees. Here partsof the domestic space were transformed into a de-individualised space. The photos, travel souvenirs and dozens of project drawings on his desk and the bookshelf above helped to project different territories, linked to different partial identities. The interior objects glowed with memories or imaginations of experience, of history, of people, that were distant in space and/or time. It is these connections with, and openness to, other space/time that in part construct the home, one that is always permeable and social. As Doreen Massey put it ‘a large component of the identity of that place called home derived precisely from the fact that it had always in one way or another been open; constructed out of movement, communication, social relations which always stretched beyond it’ (Massey, 1994: 170–171). 以线上会议为例，不少受访建筑师表示他们重新布置了房间，将室内局部布置成适合公开展示的画面，例如使用书架、装饰画和植物作为背景。此时局部的家庭空间被转化为一个挪用公共场景的去私人化空间。建筑师桌子上的照片、旅行纪念品和几十张项目图纸以及背后的书架一起，向外投射出多层次的时空领域，与居住者不同层面的身份相联系。这些室内物品闪耀着对多种经历、历史、或者人物的记忆或想象，正是与这些遥远的空间/时间的联系和向外的开放，在一定程度上构建了家，一个始终具有渗透性和社会性的家。正如Doreen Massey所说，"那个被称为家的地方的根本特征，很大程度上来自于这样一个事实——即它总是以这样或那样的方式对外开放；它总是从运动、交流、社会关系中构建出来，又进一步超越它。"（Massey，1994：170-171） A growing home 一个生长中的家 The second case-study is the home of an architect couple (Li Han & Hu Yan, the founders of Drawing Architecture Studio) who livedin a typical urban apartment with two bedrooms in Beijing. Like many successful architectural practices, their working space evolved from the bedrooms and kitchen table to a separate studio. However, they didn’t rent a standardised office but bought an apartment of two bedrooms in the same neighbourhood and changed it into a workspace/studio (Figs. 2,3). When they first moved into it, they would still go home for lunch every day. But later on, they just cookedand ate there. The stove, used to boil water and make coffee, gradually becamea real kitchen, rendering the inhabitation of the office more ambiguous and complex. One of the partners said, ‘The boundaries get blurred, especially when you don't think of it as a rented office but as a part of your home... My workhas become more and more intrusive into my domestic life, and you could evensay that it fills up my entire life. My work is my life, and my life is mywork.’ Their home grew from one place to two and constantly split like a cell. Each cell, however, contains information about the whole and is not divided up according to its function. The home territory is no longer centred around the apartment or a particular interior but is multi-centred and constantly changing as our lives unfold. An office can be one node within the network of one’s personal realm, so can a private car, a café, an art gallery, or a library. 第二个案例是一对建筑师夫妇的家（李涵与胡妍，绘造社创始人），他们住在北京一个老小区里，一套两室一厅标准住宅。像很多优秀的建筑事务所一样，他们的工作空间从卧室或厨房里的一张大桌子发展成了一个独立的工作室。然而，他们并没有租用一个标准化的办公室，而是在同一个小区又买了一套两居室，并把它改造成了一个工作空间（图2,3）。“我刚搬来工作室的时候，中午还会回家吃饭。到后来，我对这段距离也嫌麻烦了，慢慢就不回家吃了。一开始只用来烧开水、冲咖啡的灶台慢慢地变成了一个真正的厨房。我们下过饺子，蒸过包子。”李涵说，“于是界限就变得模糊了，尤其当你自己不把它当成一个租来的办公室，而是作为你自己家的一部分的时候。换句话说，我的工作对家庭生活的侵入越来越大了，甚至可以说，它填满了我的整个生活。我的工作就是生活，我的生活就是工作。”一个生长中的家，可以从一个地方发展到两个或者更多。它像细胞一样不断分裂，每个细胞中都包含着整体的信息，并非按照其功能划分。家的领域不再以某个住宅或特定的室内为中心，而是多中心的，随着我们生活的展开而不断变化。工作室可以是个人领域的一个网络节点，私家车、咖啡馆、艺术展廊或图书馆也同样。
notion image
Fig.2. Drawing Architecture Studio Office, Drawn by Drawing Architecture Studio 绘造社工作室，绘制：绘造社
notion image
Fig. 3. A Tale of Two Apartments, Drawn by Drawing Architecture Studio 双宅故事，绘制：绘造社 （点击图片查看完整访谈内容） The behavioural trajectories and space occupied by each household member within the two dwelling unit are also completely overlapping. As they said: ‘We don't need (physical) personal space or privacy between us, except occasionally when we both have online meetings, and the sound could be a bit interfering. The rest of the time we prefer sitting face-to-face and burying in our own work, or leaning togetheron the couch, socialising or entertaining.’ This is not an isolated case. Architect Feng Lu, who lived with his wife and son in an apartment of a gated community in Shanghai, also offered his opinion on personal space in his home during our interview, 此外，夫妻俩在两个居住单元内的行为轨迹和所占据的空间也几乎重叠。正如数位受访建筑师都讲到的：“我们伴侣之间不需要（物理的）个人或隐私空间，除了偶尔俩人都在开线上会议的时候，声音会有点干扰。其余时候我们更喜欢面对面坐着，埋头自己的工作，或一起靠在沙发上，社交或娱乐。”上海建筑师冯路对家宅中的个人空间问题也提出了看法： When we talk about privacy or the personal sphere in our home, it’s usually about the physical space. However, the floor area of a typical Chinese home is around 100 square meters, or less. The limited space has to include functional spaces such as the kitchen and the bathroom, leaving even less space for activities. So how can we discuss privacy in such a limited space? In my opinion, the privacy in physical space of our home might be meaningless. On the one hand, it is impossible to establish one’s own territory in such a small space. On the other hand, I don’t need a physical territory. One’s privacy is gradually being instrumentalised by technology, for example the setting of a smart phone. The moment when you sit down on the couch and take out your phone to socialise, you're in your own world, and have nothing to do with the person sitting just next to you. To a certain extent,today theway a person maintains privacy and constructs his/her own subjectivity is no longer by having an intimate space, or the space is no longer a physical space,but more of a virtual space, an information space, for example, your Facebook, WeChat, or Twitter. They construct your individuality. (Fig. 4.) 我们讨论隐私或个人空间的时候，通常是指物理空间。但是一个普通的中国住宅的面积也就100平米左右，紧张一点几十平方米。在本身住宅空间就非常有限的情况下，再去掉厨房、卫生间等，留给自己的空间其实很小。在这么小的空间里面，怎么讨论隐私？在我看来，讨论住宅中物理空间的隐私可能是没有意义的。一方面，在这么小的空间里面，已经没法建立个体的物理空间。另一方面，也不需要物理空间。个体的隐私正在逐渐被技术工具化，例如智能手机的设置。当你往沙发上一坐，拿着自己的手机看朋友圈的那一瞬间，就进入了自己的世界，就跟坐在边上的人没有关系了。在某种程度上，我认为今天一个人保持隐私、建构主体性的方式不再是拥有一个私密空间，或者说这个空间不再是一个物理空间，而更多的是一个虚拟空间、信息空间，比如说你的微信，你的朋友圈，构筑了你。(图4.)
notion image
Fig. 4. Living by interface, drawn by Feng Lu 界面化生活，绘制：冯路 （点击图片查看完整访谈内容） The observations and interviews from this research suggested that the juxtaposition, combination, and leap between physical andvirtual privacy are key scenarios of contemporary everyday life. They not onlyset us free from the limit of real space and time, but also render different spatial scales and different lengths of time equivalent, forming a seamless continuum. It shapes our perception in a particular way and can generate asense of humility and insignificance, as well as one of hubris and omnipotence through our belief in the compensatory power of technology. 本研究的观察和访谈表明，物理和虚拟空间之间的并置、结合和跳跃是当代日常生活的关键情境。它们不仅使我们摆脱了真实时空的限制，也将不同的空间尺度和时间长度相等效，形成了一个无缝的连续统一体。它以一种特殊的方式塑造了我们的感知，既能让人产生一种谦逊和渺小感，也能让我们通过相信技术的补偿能力，从而产生一种傲慢和无所不能的感觉。 Conclusion: Drawing Domesticity 结论：图绘家庭生活 We applied drawing as an exploratory and critical visual practice in this research, trying to reveal a process of thinking or forming questions, rather than presenting a singular conclusion. The drawings, including both the architects’ sketches and the authors’ diagrams, speak of how home territories are formed and appropriated by inhabitants, objects, and activities. Based on the case studies, we applied the architectural drawing conventions to everyday space/objects/practices, emphasising their importance as sites of spatial studies. The specificity of the drawings, and the character, density of traces of inhabitation, overlaid over the typically standard domestic floor plan, aerial views or axonometric, yields an understanding of the territorialisingprocess and a shift in the way our homes are conceived. Different modes of inhabitation suggest how private and social life came to be configured to respond to economic relations, and how the architectural work - the design of the external world - comes from an interior condition. When the domestic and social practices, as well as the cultures of inhabitation, encapsulated simultaneously in the drawings of the rooms, furniture, objects, and activities, we perceive them and their interactions all at once, instead of seeing them unfolding sequentially, i.e., first entering a room; second, perceiving objects in it; and third, attaching cultural significance to them, as language makes us do. 在本研究中，我们将绘图作为一种探索性和批判性的视觉实践，试图揭示思考或形成问题的过程，而不是给出单一的结论。这些绘图，包括建筑师的草图和研究者的图解，共同讲述了居民、物品和活动是如何构成和挪用家宅领域的。在案例研究中，我们将建筑绘图的惯例应用于绘制日常空间/物品/实践，旨在强调它们作为空间研究对象的重要性。叠加在标准住宅单元的鸟瞰图上的居住痕迹的特征和密度，让我们对领域化过程有了一些理解，并改变了我们对家宅的构想方式。不同的居住模式展现出私人和社会生活是如何根据经济关系进行配置的，以及建筑作品——对外部世界的设计——是如何来自室内环境的。当家庭和社会实践，以及居住文化，被同时封装在绘有房间、家具、物品和活动的图纸上，我们就能同时感知它们及其互相关系，而不是看着它们依次展开，即首先进入一个房间；然后感知其中的物品；最后将文化意义赋予其上，就像语言阐述的这样。 Drawing inhabitation - tracing patterns of inhabitation and movementin real and virtual realms - calls for following individual routines, habits, and modes across the spaces of working desk, to the neighbourhood and the city. By allowing the overlay, juxtaposition and collapse of different scales and domains into one perceptual realm, varied relations are activated, and more possibilities are explored. The drawing, as Robin Evans (1986: 3-18) insisted, is not so much a projection of an idea, it creates a particular reality of its own. The drawing of ‘A minimal home of one’s own’ in the first case-study, maps the habitual pattern of eating, working, and socialising in a fixed position at the table and shows how the frantic close circles of the mouse inscribing in the virtual world project into the real world. In the second case-study, the axonometric views of the interiors show not so much ‘home’ and ‘work’, apart from the presence of a bed. Instead, the architects’ drawings underscore the richness of their lived experience stemming from communication and intellectual pursuit. Figure 2: Drawing Architecture Studio office and figure 3: A Tale of Two Apartments, depict a culture of communication and intellectual exchange, architectural production and display. 绘制居住——描绘真实和虚拟领域中的居住和运动模式——需要追随个体的惯例、习惯和行为模式，跨越办公桌前的空间，到达住区和城市。通过将不同尺度和不同领域叠加、并置和折叠到同一个感知领域里，图绘激活了各种关系，探索了更多的可能性。正如罗宾·埃文斯（Robin Evans，1986：3-18）所强调的，图绘与其说是一个想法的投射，不如说是它自己创造了一个特定现实。第一个案例里 "一个人的极小生活空间 "的图绘，描绘了在办公桌前固定位置吃饭、工作和社交的习惯模式，并展现了鼠标在虚拟世界中疯狂滑动的路径是如何投射到现实世界中的。第二个案例，建筑师所作的室内图绘展示的并非是简单的“居住”加上“办公”（除了一张床的存在），而是强调了他们源于交流和智力追求的丰富生活体验。“绘造社工作室”和“双宅故事”两张图，描绘了一种沟通和知识交流的文化、一种建筑生产和展示的文化。 Informed by the study of architects’ work-homes during the pandemic, we suggest that home-working practices can be understood as a dynamic process of territorialisation. In this context, home territories are constantly produced and represented, in different ways and across scales. We have identified here two of the many different forms of territorial production that we are likely to find indomestic spaces. The first is the material traces left by previous behaviours, which cannot be easily erased or changed within a certain period, such as decoration, collections, or the appropriation of communal space by objects. The territories constructed are usually the result of long-term negotiations and are relatively stable. The second is routinely repeated behaviours that mark or indicate existing space boundaries in the home, such as habitual actions. These forms of territorial production are not planned or intentionally established but are, rather, consequences of regular or occasional practices. These practices may be the effects of rational and planned decisions but are not made with the explicit intent of producing a home territory (Kärrholm, 2007: 441). For example, the decoration of the interior or regular housekeeping activitiesare carried out after careful home-making considerations, but without anythought about marking or delimiting a territory. What is produced through those territorial process are not static and dichotomous home territories, but rather the dynamic spatial/social relations, including private/public, individual/collective, indoor/outdoor relationships which together constitute our homes. 通过对疫情期间建筑师的工作之家的研究，我们认为家庭生活实践可以被理解为一个动态的领域化过程。在此背景下，家宅领域以不同的方式和规模被不断地生产和呈现。在许多不同模式的领域化生产中，我们识别了有代表性的两种。其一是以往行为留下的物质痕迹，这些痕迹在一定时间内不容易被抹除或改变，例如装饰、收藏品或物品对共用空间的挪用。其构建的领域通常是长期协商的结果，相对稳定。其二是经常重复而又转瞬即逝的行为，如习惯性行动，也能够标识或暗示出家宅中的空间边界。这些模式的领域生产都不是有计划或有意为之的，而是常规或偶尔的实践的结果。虽然这些行为可能是理性的和有计划的决定的结果，但并没有明确意图去标记或生产一个家庭领域（Kärrholm, 2007: 441）。更进一步地，通过这些领域化过程产生的并非静态、二分的家庭领域，而是动态融合的空间/社会关系，包括私人/公共、个人/集体、室内/室外的关系等，它们共同构成了我们的家。 The drawings in this research yield the home territory as a multi-centred, constantly changing network composed of both physical and virtual spaces, domestic and urban spaces. In some instances, the home took on most of the roles of the traditional public sphere, i.e., performs as a mediator that both keeps people apart and brings themtogether. The trend has been accelerated by the pandemic. This is both anarchitectural prototype and a new field for architecture to confront. 最后，本研究运用图解方法论证了，家宅领域是一个多中心的、不断变化的网络，由物理和虚拟空间、家庭和城市空间共同构成。在依托城市空间的公共领域几乎崩溃的极端情况下，例如疫情隔离期间，家宅能够承担传统公共领域的大部分角色，就像置于我们之间的桌子，作为一个调停者(mediator)，既把人们分隔开，又将他们聚拢在一起。在这一趋势被疫情加速的背景下，本文认为这样一个作为调停者的开放动态的“家”既是一个建筑原型，也是建筑学要面对的一个新领域。 References 参考文献 Bachelard, G. (1969), The Poetics of Space, trans. Maria Jolas, Boston, MA: Beacon Press. Benjamin, W. (1999), The Arcades Project, Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Borsi, K. (2009), ‘Drawing and Dispute: The Strategies of the Berlin Block’, Intimate Metropolis: Urban Subjects in the Modern City,132-52. Davis, H. (2012), Living Over the Store: Architecture and local urban life, London: Routledge. Deleuze, G. and Guattari, F. (1987), A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, trans. B. Massumi,Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Dolan, T. (2012), Live-work Planning and Design: Zero-commute housing, Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &Sons. Evans, R. (1978), ‘Figures, Doors and Passages’. Architectural Design, 48: 267-78.Evans, R. (1986), ‘Translations from Drawing to Building’. AAFiles, 12: 3-18. Giudici, M. S. (2018), ‘Counter-planning from the Kitchen: for a feminist critique of type’, The Journal of Architecture,23:7-8, 1203-29. Gurstein, P. (2001), Wired to the World, Chained to the Home: Telework in daily life, Vancouver: UBC Press. Hayden, D. (1982), The Grand Domestic Revolution: A history of feminist designs for American homes,neighborhoods, and cities, Cambridge: MIT Press. Heynen, H., & Baydar, G., eds.(2005), Negotiating Domesticity: spatial productions of gender in modern architecture, Oxon: Routledge. Holliss,F. (2015), Beyond Live/Work: The architecture of home-based work, London: Routledge. Holliss, F. (2017), ‘Designing for Home-Based Work–Lessons from Two English Villages’, Architecture and Culture, 5.1: 21-39. Kärrholm, M. (2007), ‘The Materiality of Territorial Production: a conceptual discussion of territoriality,materiality, and the everyday life of public space’. Space and culture, 10(4):437-53. Mahmood, A.N. (2007), ‘Work and Home Boundaries: socio-spatial analysis of women’s live-work environments’. Housing and Society, 34(1): 77-100. Mallett, S. (2004), ‘Understanding Home: a critical review of the literature’, The sociological review, 52,1: 62-89. Marcus, C. C. (2006), House as a Mirror of Self: Exploring the deeper meaning of home, Florida: Nicolas-Hays.
Massey, D. (1994), Space, Place, and Gender, Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Rice, C. (2006), The Emergence of the Interior: architecture, modernity, domesticity, Oxon: Routledge. Rybczynski, W. (1986), Home: A short history of an idea, Vol. 10, New York: Penguin. Smitheram, J., & Woodcock, I.(2009), ‘Affective Territories’, IDEA Journal, 8-19.Tattara, M., & Aureli, P. V.(2018), ‘The Home at Work: A Genealogy of Housing for the Laboring Classes’, Harvard Design Magazine, 46: 194-202. Wise, J. M. (2000), ‘Home: Territory and Identity’, Cultural studies, 14, 2: 295-310.Zenkteler, M. et al. (2019),‘Home-based Work in Cities: In search of an appropriate urban planning response’, Futures, 102494. Acknowledgements 致谢 衷心感谢各位老师和伙伴在本项研究过程中给予的无私帮助和支持：邱嘉玥/李涵/金秋野/冯路/冯果川/庄慎/鲁安东/张斌/张佳晶/王惟捷/唐克扬/赵鹏宇/张靖/常湘绮/许昱歆/孙心莹/孙依巧/汤子馨/张天/周新人 Interiors in the Era of Covid: Interior Design between the Public and Private Realms 全书目录 General Introduction Penny Sparke, Ersi Ioannidou, Pat Kirkham, Stephen Knott, Jana Scholze Section One: Home, Health andWell-being (edited by Pat Kirkham and Stephen Knott) Introduction Pat Kirkham & Stephen Knott Chapter 1: Interwar ‘Wohnkultur’: VienneseInterior Design Reform & Hygienic Home Michelle Jackson-Beckett (Senior Lecturer,University of Applied Arts, Vienna) Chapter 2: Live Gym Classes at Home: How LeaDaan Brought Body Movement into 1930s Belgian Homes SelinGeerinckx & Els De Vos (Faculty of Design Sciences / Interior Architecture, University of Antwerp) Chapter 3: Dancing Over the Threshold: Lessonsfrom the Pandemic Alice Friedman (Grace Slack McNeil Professor of American Art, Wellesley College, USA) Chapter 4: A Space of their Own: Appropriatingthe Domestic Interior for Wellbeing in the Time of Covid ElizaSweeney (Creative Arts Therapist,Educator, & Artist) & Sebastian Messer (Senior Lecturer, Architecture and Built Environment, Northumbria University, ) Chapter 5: The Limitations of Modernisation inJapanese Housing and its Resilience in the Covid-19 situation Izumi Kuroishi (School of Creative and Cultural Studies, Yale University) Section Two: The Unstable Home (edited by Penny Sparke) Introduction Penny Sparke Chapter 6: The Materialization of Staying at Home Maja Willen (Senior Lecturer in Art History, Stockholm University) Chapter 7: Working at Home - Architects during the Pandemic in China Ye Xu (PhD candidate, University of Nottingham), Katharina Borsi (Associate Professor, University of Nottingham) & Professor Jonathan Hale (Professor of Architecture, University of Nottingham) Chapter 8: Room for Independence -Interiors ofHome-based Women Workers Fiona del Puppo (architect, engineer, and PhD candidate, EPFL, Lausanne) & Paule Perron (architect, researcher, andassistant teacher in architecture and interior design, HEAD, Geneva) Chapter 9: From Caseta to Cuarto -TransitionalJustice in Colombia Cynthia Hammond (lead author and Professor of Art History, Concordia University, Montreal), Vanessa Sicotte, Marcela Torres Molano & Greg Labrosse (Concordia University, Montreal) Chapter 10: Games without Frontiers - CovidLiving in Refugee Camps Mark Taylor (Professor of Architectural History,Swinburne University, Melbourne) & Iris Levin (Lecturer in Urban Planning,RMIT, Melbourne)
Section Three: Representations of Home (edited by Jana Scholze) Introduction Jana Scholze Chapter 11: Lockdown Uncanny on Display -Musée Dom-Ino Nina Bassoli (architect, curator and research assistant, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano) & Roberto Gigliotti (Associate Professor of Interior and Exhibition Design, Free University of Bozen-Bolzano) Chapter 12: Lockdown portraits: Resituating the Self Inga Bryden (Professor of Cultural History,University of Winchester) Chapter 13: Tell don’t show: The invisibleplague in 17th century Dutch interior paintings Irene Cieraad (Delft University of Technology) Chapter 14: Nice White Spaces -Race and Class inDomestic Cleaning Ads during Covid-19 Rachele Dini (Senior Lecturer in English and Creative Writing, University of Roehampton) Chapter 15: IKEA's Saleable Living for Pandemic Life Rebecca Carrai (PhD student, KU Leuven University) Section Four: Collecting the Interior in the Era of Covid-19 (edited by Eris Ioannidou) Introduction Ersi Ioannidou Chapter 16: Changing Scenes: Image-Making – From Parlor to Screen Patrick Lee Lucas (Associate Professor, School of Interiors, University of Kentucky) Chapter 17: Shelter in Place Gallery Eben Haines & Michelle Fisher (Curators and Directors of Shelter in Place Gallery, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston), Courtney Harris (Assistant Curator, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston) & Michelle Millar Fisher (Ronald, C. and Anita L. Wornick Curator, Museum of Fine Arts, Boston) Chapter 18: The Domestic Body Stefania Napolitano (Curator, Education Department, MAXXI Museum, Rome) Chapter 19: Interior Archipelago -Postcards from Our Islands Patrick Macklin (The Glasgow School of Art, UK), Lois Weinthal (Ryerson University, Canada) & Wen Liang (Tsinghua University,China) Chapter20: Stay Home: Rapid response collecting project at the Museum of the Home Danielle Patten (Curator, Museum of the Home, London)